Camera for Europe

The 1st thing you need to decide is what size camera do you want? Some people prefer one they can slip into their pocket or wear in a small cellphone-sized pouch on their belt. I prefer that myself, but it comes at the expense of a good zoom, interchangeable lenses (on DSLRs), and low-light performance.

Personally I own a Sony H5.(had this one for about 4 years now) Takes great shots, about $450. I've been hearing really great things about Canon G11. It's also about $450. Might find it cheaper on the internet.

My camera (Sony) uses AA batteries. I do like that. bought some rechargables, but also use Lithium, and those last a long time - even when using a flash. The Canon G11 has a rechargeable battery, so I'd buy a backup to bring with, one in the camera, one charged and ready to use.

Both of these cameras are compact size, but offer a view finder - something I must have, I just can't take a photo holding the camera away from my eyes...too shakey- blurred photos result.

Check into Canon...very highly recommended for quality.

I think that, instead of "shutter speed," you mean how fast the camera will power up and be ready to take a photo. I'm not sure those specs will be readily availably, but any good camera shop salesperson should be able to tell you.
After that, the most important thing to me is the zoom....get the greatest OPTICAL zoom you can afford, to pull in those distance shots. DIGITAL zoom is simply software extrapolation, and the quality is far inferior to optical zoom, which measures the ability of the glass lenses in your camera.

I just spent an hour at the Camera Company here in Madison waiting for help on a problem and listened to the staff talk with others about the latest point and shoot cameras. They said you need to think about how much zoom you want, how bad the delay is (I think that's what you mean when you say shutter speed) and how much you want to spend. People were looking at Canon Elfs, Nikons, and the Casio. I would really recommend that you go to a real camera store and get a good staffer to help you. These guys in Madison were great.

As for batteries, I really prefer the camera specific battery. They last longer than the AA's. I had a point shoot that took the AA's and I felt like I was constantly buying new batteries or charging batteries. The staff member at the Camera Company commented that batteries were really excellent these days and that the companies had figured out how to optimize the usage of electricity and the design of the battery.

Pam

Faith,

Although you're a "traveling student" and not a professional Photographer, if you want PERFECT photos of the places you visit, you'll need a Camera that can make that possible. In most cases, that means a dSLR.

Cameras fall into three "general" categories:

> P&S models (such as the Canon Elf series or others - advantages are small size and therefore very easy to carry - most provide only automatic functions and few if any manual controls - these usually have limited wide angle and zoom in the range of 3-4x)

> Superzoom models (such as the Canon SX10-IS - somewhat larger and close to the size of a dSLR - provide some wide angle capability and good image stabilized zoom - some provide good ISO range, however at higher settings "noise" can be an issue)

> Digital SLR's (such as the Canon T2i - the entry level dSLR's tend to be smaller and lighter and therefore easier to carry - these provide several significant benefits over the others, such as the ability to use a wide range of settings such as Aperture Priority, Shutter Priority or others, good ISO range and of course interchangeable Lenses - however, there IS a learning curve with these so it's a good idea to become familiar with the Camera BEFORE the trip starts - these also provide the ability to take RAW photos which produce higher quality images than the compressed JPEG's produced by the other models).

I'd suggest speaking with staff at a local Camera store and also reading the reviews at This site, This site, This site or others.

Good luck with your choice!

Faith,

I recently went through the agonizing, sometimes painful, complicated, humbling, and confounding process of buying a new camera and have lived to tell the tale (although it was touch and go for a while). Needless to say, I think I might understand where you are at and have great empathy.

A website that may have saved me from going completely mad and kept (some) hair on my husband's head is Digital Photography Review. One feature on this site that helped keep everything together is the "Buying Guide" tab on the left. You can choose the "Features Search," which allows you to select which features you want and then it'll tell you which cameras have what you're looking for, and/or you can choose the "Side By Side," where you can put in any number of the cameras you're considering and it'll line them up like little soldiers so you can compare them, well, side by side.

While I like Pam's advice about going into a camera store (particularly if there is a camera you think might be "the one" - it's important to see it in person), I'd just advise you go in with caution. We went into several on our mad hunt, and the thing is, a camera store wants to sell you a camera/brand that they have in inventory, not necessarily inform you of the camera that would best suit your needs. We found it best to do our own research online first.

FWIW, the camera we ended up getting is the Panasonic Lumix DMC-TZ5. It's a few Lumix models old but we liked the features and bought it used on eBay.

Also FWIW, our old camera had disposable batteries, this one has rechargables. I love the rechargables - and you can also buy those on eBay for a fraction of what you'd pay in a camera store.

Good luck!

PS It took me so long to type my post that Ken snuck in before me and also gave you the link to DP Review. Sorry for the redundancy!

Ken - why limit your creativity with just a dSLR? Why not a 645 or 4X5 technical camera with ultra sharp lenses and a Phase One P45 39MP back?

Consult Consumer's Report magazine - they did a real good evaluation and explanation on all types of cameras.

I think the most important question to answer is, how do you want to use or display the photos you take on vacation? If your main goal is to make 4x6 prints to put in a scrapbook or show them to friends on your laptop I think that you would be wasting your money buying a digital SLR. I own and use dSLRs a lot, but they are big and heavy. If your camera becomes a nuisance because it’s heavy, you will start leaving it behind now and then and miss some interesting photos. So, if you don’t want to display some nice sharp 11x14 or larger prints on your wall or are not going for an exhibit in a gallery, I suggest you get something that you can stick in your pocket.

If you buy a small camera, don’t fall for the “more megapixels are better” argument. A sales person might try to impress you with the latest 10 or 12 MP model when you could save a hundred bucks by buying last year’s 7 MP model. I’ve had great luck with a couple of Canons that capture only 5 MP and 6 MP.

What will make you miss an action shot is not shutter speed but the fact that non-dSLR cameras have a short delay from the time that you press down the shutter to the time that it captures the image. This is where dSLRs, which have no delay, have it all over small cameras. If you’re going to shoot a lot of sporting events you might still opt for the dSLR. Otherwise you can reduce the delay in pocket cameras by purchasing the fastest memory card you can find. I like Lexar Professional 300x cards.

To reduce the chance of blurry photos use a moderately high ISO setting, like 400 or maybe 800 (especially if it’s not a sunny day). If you use an ISO that’s too high your photos may start to get grainy looking so experiment a bit and find out what works best for your situation.

I prefer to recharge batteries than to recharge the camera. That way your camera is not out of commission while waiting for it to recharge. And always carry an extra fully charged battery with you and recharge the used one ASAP.

Ron,

I'm not quite sure how to respond to your comment? Even though MF Cameras are capable of great photos (especially a 39 MP model!), they're not the most practical for travel. I'm sure cost would be an issue also. A compact dSLR is a much more practical and realistic choice.

Cheers!

Ron,

"MY point actually is that it is not the equipment in the front that makes a "perfect" photograph. It's the photographer behind the equipment"

Absolutely! A Camera is only as good as the person behind the Lens. However, I've found that a dSLR provides the Photographer with a greater flexibility in controls and shooting modes. If the Photographer knows how to use these, the likelihood of a "great picture" is improved.

On those occasions when I've travelled with only a P&S, I'm often frustrated by the lack of controls and wide angle or zoom capability. It makes it much more difficult for me to get the shots I want.

Cheers!

MY point actually is that it is not the equipment in the front that makes a "perfect" photograph. It's the photographer behind the equipment.

Unless you are photographing fast sports action, compact, lightweight modern digital cameras are every bit as capable of taking "perfect" photos as dSLRs.

Years ago I carried a full SLR body, lenses, filters, tripod, etc. (plus film) for a multi-country trip through Asia.

My wife and I went with a friend from college and his wife. He carried an all-in-one auto-focus point and shoot Canon that was just larger than pocket size.

My pictures came back and they were wonderful. His pictures came back and they were wonderful too. Mine weren't nearly enough better than his to justify packing the weight.

Since then, I've gone with the smallest point and shoot I can find. A neck strap from a thumb drive is a perfect replacement for the wrist strap they come with.

The features I like: Quick shutter release, large viewing window, at least 5x optical zoom, battery life (hopefully better than 200 shots on a charge), small, and good optics for good pictures. Most also come with a host of other options for different shooting situations.

Right now I have a pocket size Nikon with 7x optical zoom. It was about $200 at Costco.

I would avoid brands like Kodak, Panasonic, Casio, etc. Ultimately, the lens quality limits picture quality more than anything else - only the brands with great lenses will deliver great pictures. I always get great results from Canon or Nikon. Others are talking up Sony's new optics too, but I've never owned one.

I work with many professional photographers who suggest a Canon G-10. It's larger than pocket size but a lot smaller than an SLR and lens. Apparently most pros carry a G-10 as a backup camera, they run about $500 (one of the features they really like, that I wouldn't use, is the hot shoe for adding an external flash).

"I would avoid brands like Kodak, Panasonic, Casio, etc. Ultimately, the lens quality limits picture quality more than anything else - only the brands with great lenses will deliver great pictures."

I am certainly not a camera expert, nor pretend to be one, but my extensive research due to our recent camera hunt showed that Panasonic had become a major player in the camera market in recent years. It surprised me, too, as I always thought we'd either go with Nikon (which we've always used) or Canon. But it turned out that both Panasonic and Sony had started producing quality/innovative goods that can now compete with (and in some cases exceed) the other two mainstays.

Our new (used) Panasonic has some sort of Leica lens that took great pictures on our recent trip and we are quite pleased with it.

(Faith, some, but not all, of the other cameras we checked out were the Canon G9, G10, and G11, Sony DSC-HX1, Nikon P6000, P100, Panasonic DMC-ZS1, DMC-ZR3, etc., but our camera needs might differ to what you are looking for, which is why all the personal reasearch is a necessary - if daunting - task.)

"If you buy a small camera, don’t fall for the “more megapixels are better” argument."

The number of megapixels has little or nothing to do with the quality of the photo -- it just determines how big a print you can make, and how much you can crop the photo and still get a good print. You don't need 10 or 12 megapixels unless you want to make poster sized prints, or be able to severely crop a photo.

Other things to be aware of:

(1) Camera manufacturers often cut corners with the memory cards they provide with their cameras -- this is so they can offer a more attractive "shelf price" for the camera. You will probably want to buy a memory card that holds a lot more photos than the one that comes with your camera, so factor that in to the cost.

(2) Assuming your camera has a rechargeable battery, you will need a European adapter plug so that you can plug in the camera's battery charger in Europe (EU countries). If you are going to the UK, you will also need a different adapter for the UK. Your camera store will hopefully have these, but if not, you can get them at Radio Shack, from Amazon, etc.

(3) Most cameras sold these days come with battery chargers that will work both in the USA (110 current) and in Europe (220 current) with no problem. Just plug it in. But, be sure to check what it says on the adapter -- if it says 110/220, it works fine.

Another feature to look for is image stabilization. It makes it easier to take pictures in low light--like in cathedrals and museums that forbid flash photography--without the pictures turning out too blurry.

I wanted to thank the other respondents for their ideas and suggestions--I may be in the market for a new digital camera myself, since mine is five years old. (Which I think is 35 years old in dog years.)

I should let this go but since you put my name in BOLD, I feel emboldened to continue. ;-)

I think the you are missing the point of what I and (I think) Brad are trying to say, it is that the perception that a "better" more flexible system with more lenses will give the photographer better images does not coincide with the reality of the images produced.

Am I likely to change your opinion, probably not. But I also stand by my assertion that unless you are shooting a significant amount of fast action sports and your kids soocer games DO count, that you don't really need a dSLR.

Many newer point and shoot digital cameras have several shooting modes and manual controls. Need a wider angle? Move back. Need more zoom? Get closer. Will that always work? no, but you get the point, I hope.

For me, the camera that I can put in my pocket and have available fits the bill. Not something that feels like a boat anchor after a couple of hours.

A couple of links for your perusal and to illustrate a point....

the first is a colection of photos by Chase Jarvis ( a professional photog) taken entirely with his iPhone. While all the images may not be everyone's cup of tea I'd bet that you'll find some of them moving and beautiful.

http://www.chasejarvis.com/index.php#mi=2&pt=1&pi=10000&s=0&p=5&a=0&at=0

The other is another collection of iPhone photos.

http://www.thebestcamera.com/

Ron,

"a "better" more flexible system with more lenses will give the photographer better images does not coincide with the reality of the images produced"

Yes, absolutely! Again, it's the skill of the person behind the glass that produces the end result, regardless of type of Camera. A professional can get great results with a P&S or in the case of your example, an IPhone, but there's a reason most professionals don't use that sort of Camera as their primary equipment when they're working for clients.

"Am I likely to change your opinion, probably not."

Correct, this DOESN'T change my opinion. In my first reply, I provided a brief description of the three main classes of Cameras, so that the OP could decide which worked best for her particular travel style and needs. Each type of Camera has advantages and disadvantages, and hopefully the OP will find something that works for her.

One of the main issues with dSLR's is size and weight of course. While my 40D can feel like a "boat anchor" after a few hours, I don't mind carrying it as it provides the ability to get shots that aren't possible with other types of Cameras. I'm somewhat "larger" so hauling kit around isn't too much of an issue. I've travelled with both P&S and dSLR's, so I have a good idea what works best for me, and why it works best. According to the financial reports today, Canon has seen a huge increase in dSLR sales (despite the economy), so it would seem that many people are deciding to try this type of Camera.

While I'm not a "professional", I've been involved with Photography since the late '60s, including darkroom work. Now that I'm retired, it's again becoming a more prominent part of my activities (but NO MORE darkroom work!).

The images from Chase Jarvis were great! Interesting that he has studios in both Seattle and Paris.

Cheers!

I would not want to go again without my DSLR for the reasons Ken mentioned. We take my wife's point and shoot and under most conditions it does fine. I agree that the person behind the camera makes a huge difference by knowing composition, quality of light etc. For typical travel snapshots and even landscapes the point and shoot is really good. No need to be concerned about a shallow depth of field making the background blurry when you don't want it to be. Of course that can be elimated with the DSLR with the aperture setting. For most people who just want to take travel snapshots a p&s is all they need. We take a lot of those but there are times when I try to set up for good composition, lighting, long exposures for night etc.. A p&s will have much more in camera processing than a DSLR and for that reason many people look at a comparison without any post processing of the images and cannot see a difference or even give the edge to the p&s. A DSLR usually requires more post processing on the computer. I do a lot of post processing because I shoot almost entirely in raw now and can do things with my images when pp that I cannot do with a p&s in jpg or even a DSLR in jpg. My travel photos now are much better than those of 6-10 years ago and I attribute that to being more knowledgable about photography and better equipment such as a DSLR. Less noise, cropping advantage and printing photos much larger without losing image quality. For photo enthusiasts like Ken they want the flexibility of the DSLR. I agree but the majority of the people take a p&S and are completely happy doing it that way. I just don't consider it an inconvenience or a hassle to take my DSLR and two lens because I love photography as well as travel and for me the two are compatible.

Ron and Ken are talking past one another.

One is a photographer who is looking forward to taking some photos away from home.

The other is a tourist hoping to get some nice photos to remember the trip by.

Both are correct for the prospective they come from.

The OP simply needs to know which s/he is and go from there.

There. Now can the talking past each other cease?

How refreshing to read a thread where there are different opinions presented in a civilized way. I think Ken & Ron, in particular, have done a great job of this.
Wish more threads were like this.
Robyn

After this I'm done......:-)

Randy -you might find it interesting that I'd put both Ken and I in your first category. While I'm not retired yet, I have been doing photography about as long. Some of that time was as a pro, although that seems a long time ago.

We just have different approaches and philosophies perhaps.

Bought a P&S Canon A1000 IS last Aug for a trip to Ireland. I took over 600 photos, and was more than pleased for the price I paid. I put it on the automatic setting, pointed it at the landscape/buildings and snapped some shots. I am no expert, just a tourist wanting a dependable camera for some photos to remember my trip. Dan

After years of lugging gear around I've officially made the jump to a Canon s90 as of today for travel.

I'm with Ron, the camera you have with you is the best camera and I just don't enjoy traveling with a DSLR + 2-3 lens kit. I'll see if I miss it on our trip to Spain and Paris this May.

For the original poster depending on your price range I would look to Canon or Panasonic for the best price-to-value. Find out what features matter to you and pick from there. Image Stabilization is nice and a lot of mid-range cameras are doing SD and even HD movies.

I'd stay away from anything that doesn't accept SD cards and just make sure the recharger allows for 110-220v (Most do).

Tyson,

Did you happen to see the very comprehensive review for the Canon S-90 at www.dpreview.com? It was lengthy but very interesting reading.

Ken,

Yes I did read that review and it was quite thorough. As far as the image quality and my shooting style the S90 seems to be a good choice. Most of my shooting is either landscape, street or still life. If I get an interesting image that doesn't quite make it technically it goes into the Holga PP file and I have fun butchering it in PS. I was trying to hold off and not buy until next generation introduced on-board geo-tagging but I got a bit desperate with the upcoming trip.

Handling is always going to be a very subjective matter. As soon as the camera arrives I'm going to spend a lot of time playing with it to see how it feels to me. If it's frustrating it's going back to Costco although it sounds that there is an aftermarket stick on grip that helps a lot.

When I listed the options I like, I should have included image stabilization. It helps get decent results in low light (and flashes a warning when image stabilization is likely to be inadequate to produce a sharp picture).

The general wisdom is to buy the best camera you can afford, and make sure it has a good lens. On digital cameras make sure that the viewfinder still lets you see what you are about to shoot. I have a Sony that's real crappy in sunlight; my wife's Olympus doesn't have that problem. And just to reiterate a point someone made above: it's not the camera that takes great pictures. If you need any evidence of that consider Cartier Bresson - the master of snapshots. The cameras he used were simple by today's standards, but some of the pictures he took with them are masterpieces.